Hollywood’s eco hypocrisy

Hollywood A-listers love to trumpet their green credentials. Guy Adams reports on a film-maker who’s out to expose them.

For years, they’ve preached green living while traveling the world in SUVs, limousines and private jets. But now Hollywood’s foremost tree-huggers face the prospect of being exposed as eco-hypocrites – in the very medium that finances their extravagant carbon footprints in the first place.

Robert Redford became the latest movie star to have his environmental credentials publicly ridiculed on film this week, when a hostile documentary was released in which he stood accused of failing to practise the environmentalism that he so vehemently preaches.

The short film, Robert Redford: Hypocrite, was released on Friday, via YouTube, to coincide with the closing days of his Sundance Film Festival. Depending on your point of view, it represented either a cheap hatchet-job or a stunning evisceration of a pioneering green activist who was once lauded on Time Magazine’s list of environmental “superheroes”.

According to the film, Redford recently sold a dozen plots of land near to the Sundance ski resort in Utah, which he owns, to developers seeking to build luxury homes there. The revelation is especially contentious because each of the sites sits on an undeveloped ridge, in what was previously wilderness. Ironically, Redford recently stuck his head above the parapet to lobby against a similar project in California’s Napa Valley, where he keeps a home. Mind you, the film points out, the nimby-ish actor did not stand to profit from the Napa development. The plots of land near Sundance, by contrast, fetched him around $2m each.

49 thoughts on “Hollywood’s eco hypocrisy”

Everyone in Hollywood is a professional: at stating with complete evident sincerity things which have nothing to do with what they really think. It’s called either “acting” or “lying”, depending on context.

I thought Andrew Breitbart was going to open a new site called “Big Environment”, to be hosted by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney. It would likely be the second website I visit each day; following this one of course…

This is great, we all know fakes like Al Gore have been exposed for the corrupt opportunists that they are, its brilliant to see someone use the same analytical mind on celebrities.
In Canada, director James Cameron gave a Native American reserve millions of dollars to help finance a lawsuit against the government, claiming oilsands development 100’s miles away was harming their people.
Nobody even bothered to look at the geography of the area, which in fact, sat on one of the biggest uranium deposits on the continent. Coincidentally right near the rivers they use for drinking water.
People also seem to forget that when James Cameron made ” Titanic” his company dumped a massive amount of polluted water in the closest strait where they were filming in Mexico. The pollutants in the water killed a massive amount of sea life and crippled the economy of a already-poor Mexican shanty town.
And here they tell us to conserve less? Disgusting.

There are plenty of eco hypocrites, but the piece against Redford seems pretty contrived. In the entire segment they only came up with two “hypocritical” items? There are lots of reasons he could be opposed to someone else’s real estate plans. Doesn’t necessarily mean he is being inconsistent. As for the United ad: first, big deal; second, maybe he feels United is greener than the competition, or some other reason. I doubt Redford’s position is that all users of oil are evil and that oil should be immediately abolished. Doing an ad for a company that uses oil (um, that means every company in the world) doesn’t necessarily mean he is being hypocritical.

There will no doubt be some good Hollywood exposures coming out of the hypocrite series, but what they’ve done so far with Redford is pretty contrived and unconvincing and, therefore unfortunately, unpersuasive and potentially in bad taste.

I’ve always felt until these famous rich people and rich politicians, that travel the world freely, start living what they preach; nobody should listen. It’s just too bad there are so many people that are to stupid to see they’re being duped.

Al Gore, Sting, James Cameron, David Suzuki, Boner……ummm, I mean Bono, now Robert Redford, all exposed as hypocrites and more to come, hopefully. Every time one of these celebs start preaching about how we should live I wish I could ask them to their face what changes they have made or are willing to make, where their money is invested and then, most importantly, I would ask what gives them the right to tell me anything about anything. Must be nice to want for nothing and be able to tell people with real wants and needs that they must suffer and/or go without. Go without things that they themselves take for granted. I’m a firm believer in, “What goes around comes around” and that people get what they deserve. It’s really nice to see these hypocrites getting called out.

Look, I’m as happy as the next guy to see hypocrisy called out among the Hollywood elite or others in the CAGW crowd. I’m just saying that the film seemed to be grasping at straws in Redford’s case. Gee, he owns a ski resort and sells expensive houses. So what. Show me Gore making $ hand over fist with the CAGW scare — definitely an ulterior motive in his message. Show me Pacchuri making $ on the side while promoting scare stories from his perch at the IPCC — definite conflict of interest. These are the kinds of things that are clear and recognizable. Maybe Redford is as bad as the worst of the lot, I don’t know. The video sure didn’t present much tantalizing evidence, however. Think about it, what did this expose of Redford’s hypocrisy consist of? Several slow panning shots across landscapes with music in the background, coupled with 2 or 3 extremely vague and general statements that amounted to little more than insinuations. No details, no real information on Redford’s position or what he has publicly said on specific items, just a label that he’s “green”. No meat or substance here. Again, maybe he is a hypocrite, I don’t know, but the video was a pretty poor hatchet job.

BTW, I think you’re the one who said you liked Redford, not me. :)

BTW2, just curious about your screen name. Would you mind sharing why you chose it? I’m just curious.

Filming “Milagro Beanfield War” Redford would drive to within a mile of the location, then get on his mountain bike “to get the feel of the location”. I’m sure everyone was told he didn’t actually bike out to the scene.

Redford, Gore, Hansen and all the rest are from the same DNA. They may not all make the same money, and I believe Gore is in the lead here, but they all benefit in some way and none of them have to pay such a large proportion of their income for energy as the rest of us.

Went to see great British comedian & comedy writer 76 year old Barry Cryer last month for a birthday treat. During it he noted how people don’t listen to what they say. He told the tale of Bono & U2 giving a concert in Manchester, the band were strumming gently, Bono was gently rhythmically clapping into the microphone, then he apparently said “every time I clap my hands, a child dies in Africa”. Allegedly somebody shouted back “then stop f*%^&£$g clapping, then”!

Redford is certainly not alone here. Many many celebs think that buying a prius to go round the garden in while driving a Cadi on the road gives them the right to tell us plebs what to do. Just wait for Obama’s win in 2012 to see how big that bandwagon is. Who voting the Calif nutcases back in at the last election?

Hypocrites one and all. Some less so than others. Maybe, just maybe, Redford is not the worst.

I refuse to be lectured to reduce my minuscule carbon footprint by people who have carbon footprints in excess of 20 times the size of my own. Especially over what is no more than a flaky, unsubstantiated theory of Catastrophic AGW. There is strong evidence suggestive of a mild and logarithmic regional warming which can be attributed to increased CO2, but even this does not amount to absolute 100% fact as yet. As for catastrophic global warming? There is zero evidence of this.

I am not going to make do with less, so that they can have even more! After all, most of these rich jet-setting celebrities and politicians and environmental alarmists do not even pay for their own flights. They go on expenses which are met by the paying customers (cinema goers) or by the tax-payers.

Where is the incentive for celebrities and politicians to reduce their own carbon footprints if they are not paying personally for their own carbon?

I have to pay personally out of my own pocket for every gram of carbon I produce, so I am careful, because I am not rich. So I utterly and completely refuse to cut back at all, until these rich wasteful alarmists practice what they preach!

Can’t call this a film, my gosh it’s no more than any 6th grader could do. But fact is Redford is a blinding hypocrite. If he lived to his own standards he would not be running a ski resort to which thousands fly and drive to every week, he would not star in Hollywood movies which burn more energy in an hour of production than a normal person does in a year (at least), he would not jet across world, and of course he would not sell pristine wilderness to developers.

Anyone who is living the life of a Hollywood star and lecturing us on being green is a bald faced hypocite, I don’t know how every person in America can’t see this.

How many African children could the money from a U2 production feed? How many water treatment plants would the budget and profits from Titanic or Avatar build? How many Habitat for Humanity homes could be built for the price of the Goricle’s mansion?

It is one thing to support a cause, it is another to campaign actively, aggresively and sanctimoniously to impede other peoples’ livelyhoods and freedoms. I’ll listen these jack-holes when they start living in 2500 sq foot ranch houses and contribute any income over, oh I don’t know, we’ll say $250,000 a year, to their various causes. 99% of American would be happy a hell to be making that much a year.

The worst mistake these film makers commit (and I am an admirer of Not-evil-just-wrong), is that they are trivialising the activities of these people by using the mild euphemism ‘hypocrite.’

Let’s not delude ourselves. The whole AGW industry is being promoted by people of power and/or significant influence whose implied goal is to deprive the citizens of the world the means and freedom to consume, while they themselves live as high on the hog as any medieval baron ever did.

What is even more bizarre, is that many of these Hollywood elites who would call themselves left wing liberals, are campaigning for policies that are directly threatening to the wellfare and quality of life of their traditional flock – working people.

It is the greatest tragedy today – and an indication at how deluded people have become – that it is now to those on the right of the political spectrum that working people have too look for protection, while those on the left tighten the screw with their carbon taxes, energy rations, bans on certain behaviours, the curtailment of economic growth and the impending crushing of ordinary people to satisfy their religious zealotry.

Hypocrisy I can live with. But the boot of some energy dictator on my throat? No way.

The same thing that happened to a fella named ‘Lot’ thousands of years ago would happen to anyone of us today in Hollywood. We wouldn’t be able to find 10 good men (or women) and we’d barely make it out of town with the clothes on our back. (Note: In case it does happen to you, put a blindfold on your wife’s eyes, she may also be tempted to look back.)

Popular Myths – (in decending order)
Actors are Real People (actually <2.5% are)
The Media Always Tell the Truth (actually <10% do at any one point in time)
Scientists Always Tell the Truth (actually <25% do this on a regular basis, there is just so much we do not know)

Actors are entertainers and most of them are high school dropouts (this is a fact). Their entire career is pretending to be someone and something they are not, why anyone would be interested in their opinions is a mystery to me. It is so much more fun to simply watch them crash and burn because they are incapable of self control and living a normal life.

mkelly says:
March 4, 2011 at 6:30 am
“My vote for biggest hypocite is Sir Branson owner of Virgin Airlines. If you honestly believed CO2 was leading to CAGW then shut down the airline. Does he not know that planes produce CO2?”

Eric Anderson says:
March 3, 2011 at 8:45 pm
“Doesn’t necessarily mean he is being inconsistent. As for the United ad: first, big deal; second, maybe he feels United is greener than the competition, or some other reason. ”

Nick says:
March 4, 2011 at 7:51 am
“All Jet engines burn fuel in the same way.
United is no greener than any other carrier.”

Actually, no. There are turbojets and turbofans. In subsonic flight turbofans are more efficient. Or at lower speeds, turboprops. There are also ramjets and scramjets. If United were to use a higher proportion of high-bypass-ratio turbofans than other carriers (I have no idea whether they do) then they could quite legitimately be considered “greener”.

Pitt doesn’t really deserve derision for this. He wasn’t behind it, it was a look-a-like contest in Copenhagen during the Copenhagen climate clusterflop. For the most part, Pitt has not shot off his mouth telling other what to do.

After making the movie “Seven Years in Tibet” he was being interviwed by Time magazine and was asked what China should do about Tibet. His response: “You shouldn’t speak until you know what you’re talking about. That’s why I get uncomfortable with interviews. Reporters ask me what I feel China should do about Tibet. Who cares what I think China should do? I’m a f—ing actor! They hand me a script. I act. I’m here for entertainment. Basically, when you whittle everything away, I’m a grown man who puts on makeup.”

The point is simply that doing a United add does not in and of itself mean Redford is a hypocrite. Did Redford say airlines are evil and destroying the planet? Did he say people shouldn’t fly? If so, then he is a hypocrite. If not, they are grasping at straws.

Again, Redford may be the worst of the lot, I don’t know, but the film sure didn’t provide any details to support the “hypocrite” allegation. I’m willing to speak up against nonsense from the CAGW crowd; I’m also willing to point out when someone with a skeptical take is making vague, unsubstantiated, over-the-top insinuations. Doesn’t help the cause.

Yeah well.
What did you expect?
Actors are people who can hold two things similtaneously and not get mixed up with which place they are at.

They live their lifes in the real world.
They act (often extraordinarily well) in a fantacy world and believe in it, as long as the acting requires it.
One day – a preacher – the next a mass murderer – easy for those with the skills.

The thing is, to be a good actor you must believe in the part that you play.
So believing in the need to combat so called global warming and living the life of a high flying CO2 emitter comes naturally.
They get all the good vibes by “talking the talk” and get all the good feelings by walking or rather flying and driving, a quite different walk.

You should not expect anything different from great actors.
Split personality is a job prerequisite.

So, the gist of this story is that this actor uses his influence to block development in an area where he is impacted, but sells mountaintop real estate to big development in a place where he won’t have to see his view impinged.
Sort of tastes like dual agency disclosure but with a bizzare twist somewhere in the DNA chain.
C’mon, take the money and run.
Double Standard at it’s finest.

BTW2, just curious about your screen name. Would you mind sharing why you chose it? I’m just curious.

I used to change ID’s a lot because I’d get bored with them. Then I saw that Anthony was addressing a global warming believer about using different names to make arguments like he was more than one person, and he told him he wanted him to use just one ID. I wasn’t doing that same thing, and Anthony hadn’t said anything yet about it to me, but still I thought it would be good to settle with one name. I don’t want to be contrary to the rules, even in blogs that I don’t like when I’m at them. I think it is so fascinating that there are amino acids in meteorites that I stuck with that one.

p.s., did you watch the video linked on my ID? It’s Dennis Miller. You will probably get a good laugh.

With regards to Earth Hour here in NSW my heater and air conditioner are both going to be on full bore, fighting for supremacy. With all the lights on so I can see who wins. After all our coal fired power stations are still producing the power, it’d be a shame not to use it.

Billy Liar says:
March 4, 2011 at 12:29 pm
“Almost all commercial planes now use high bypass ratio turbofans for the simple reason that they are more efficient and hence better for the bottom line.”

I’ll grant you that old-fashioned turbojets are now rare, but turboprops are quite common on short and medium haul routes. More to the point, different turbofans have different bypass ratios, so some are “greener” than others. The cost optimum isn’t the same for every operator, especially since some have older fleets than others.

Robert Redford, Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron and all the other “green” Superstars are invited to our first international uranium film festival in Rio de Janeiro May 21-28, 2011, to help us to get rid of nuclear power plants and uranium mining world-wide! What do You think? Will they come and/or help us with their millions $?

Chernobyl, Fukushima, Rio de Janeiro? We have 2 nuclear power plants in Brazil close to Rio de Janeiro, and the Government wants to built up to 50 more and a nuclear submarine. We have an uranium mine in Bahia that contaminates earth and water, and new mines are planned even in the Amazon region.
Our first international film festival about nuclear energy, uranium mining and radioactive risks is part of a movement to stop nuclear energy projects and uranium mining world-wide and to promote sustainability.
Any help is welcomed! Your are invited.

Urânio em Movi(e)mento, the First International Uranium Film Festival invites you to Rio de Janeiro, May 21st to 28th 2011. The main locations of the festival are the two beautiful cultural centres Parque das Ruinas and Laurinda Santos Lobo in the famous quarter Santa Teresa. The festival team has now selected 15 feature documentaries and movies and 19 short films: 7 films from USA, Brazil 5, Germany 5, Australia 4, France 3, Africa do Sul 2, Costa Rica 1, Sweden 1, Russia 1, India 1, Denmark 1, Georgia/Netherlands 1, Canada 1, United Kingdom 1.

There will be 18 Latin American Premieres and 2 World Premiers. The films cover nearly the whole nuclear fuel cycle and radioactive disasters: from Uranium Mining to Nuclear Power Plants and Castor transports; from nuclear ship accidents to Chernobyl and the nuclear accident of Goiânia; from Hiroshima to the depleted uranium munitions scandal in the gulf wars.After Rio de Janeiro the Uranium Film Festival will travel to Sao Paulo (June 3-5) and to the Cities of the Northeast Recife, Natal, João Pessoa and Fortaleza in August. A special session is also planned in Salvador the capital of Bahia, the state with Brazils second uranium mining complex Caetité/Lagoa Real.